My own take on the whole anti-hijacking song-and-dance is that I'd far rather just take my chances. I take worse chances of being killed when I go on one of my long (1000-mile and more) road trips, after all...and smart terrorists could think of lots of other evil things to do that would disrupt things immensely without going near airliners.
My take on the scanners is... so what? Then again, if it were up to me, people would be free to walk around naked anywhere they like, and shortly thereafter, everyone would be over their stupid body taboos.
But it's not involuntary. It's not even coerced. If you don't like it, don't fly. The market will sort it out... or it would, if the airlines weren't so heavily subsidized. As for me, I've been patronizing Amtrak for years. But some silly scanners are the least of my reasons.
There's absolutely no parallel. You're the second person to equate these scanners to rape. Frankly, that's just mind-boggling. They're not even on the same continuum of personal violations.
People are already firebombing and chainsawing speed cameras. If they start putting body scanners in places where surveillance isn't justified, well... they'll exhaust their budget real quick.
NO, it is still voluntary. If I have to travel for work, I choose to travel via air for convenience. I could drive. I could also chose to have a job that doesn't require travel at all. Those are choices.
Actually it is coerced. Go visit Tulsa where they started testing this technology. There's an "Express line" to get through security where you don't have to go through the invasive/useless security processes. They don't tell you that they're imaging you in this fashion. They just call it the express lane.
How is that coercion? You choose to go in the Express Lane, and I suspect that there is a sign somewhere that tells you what is happening. You also are choosing to fly in the first place.
I agree--and in this case, a) there's a disconnect between the people at the machine and those at the readout screen, so that the person viewing the screen can't see who the image belongs to, and b) there's supposed to be no way to save any images, to ensure they can't get to the press or blogs.
Mind you, I don't believe that either of these safeguards are remotely foolproof.
That said--yeah, so what? I think it's much ado about nothing.
I have a friend who is a TSA agent. I have asked her to post a picture of what the scanner see's when SHE is the subject.
She is a prude and I was proven right when she refused. I think that whenever anyone has to go pass one of the scanners they should see posted on the machine a picture of the person running the machine when they were scanned.
One thing I find interesting is that they only post images of women using the backscatter tech. Makes one wonder what a guy would look like. That might really throw up some alarms for people.
So the next murderer blows up a twenty kilo semtex and nail bomb ten feet in front of the scanner. Or better yet, fourteen of them do, simultaneously, at fourteen airports. Now what do they do?
These scanners are an incredible victory both for the enemies of liberty- who want us arguing about the tiny nuances of our obedience- and our active military enemies, too.
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=92.1){kind=small}
March 20 2010, 18:32:06 UTC 2 years ago
March 20 2010, 20:20:50 UTC 2 years ago
March 20 2010, 22:25:51 UTC 2 years ago
March 20 2010, 21:25:47 UTC 2 years ago
March 20 2010, 20:24:05 UTC 2 years ago
March 20 2010, 20:26:09 UTC 2 years ago
March 20 2010, 20:35:27 UTC 2 years ago
March 20 2010, 23:37:45 UTC 2 years ago
What's next? Telling rape victims that it was actually voluntary because they were out late at night and "dressed sexy?"
March 20 2010, 23:40:06 UTC 2 years ago
March 21 2010, 00:03:17 UTC 2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
Anonymous
2 years ago
2 years ago
Anonymous
2 years ago
March 20 2010, 23:41:24 UTC 2 years ago
first they took away our airlines, then they'll take away our trains, and then they took our cars...
scanners are popping up everywhere. sooner or later, we'll have to say "no".
the women in England said "no", and they did not fly, and were also detained. course England might as well be hell for personal rights.
#
March 20 2010, 23:50:34 UTC 2 years ago
March 21 2010, 14:04:14 UTC 2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
March 21 2010, 03:48:07 UTC 2 years ago
March 21 2010, 14:03:07 UTC 2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
March 20 2010, 22:04:52 UTC 2 years ago
Mind you, I don't believe that either of these safeguards are remotely foolproof.
That said--yeah, so what? I think it's much ado about nothing.
March 20 2010, 20:40:10 UTC 2 years ago
In Russian slang "5 балов"!
March 21 2010, 01:23:07 UTC 2 years ago
She is a prude and I was proven right when she refused. I think that whenever anyone has to go pass one of the scanners they should see posted on the machine a picture of the person running the machine when they were scanned.
March 21 2010, 01:43:53 UTC 2 years ago
March 21 2010, 14:05:19 UTC 2 years ago
March 21 2010, 14:08:38 UTC 2 years ago
March 21 2010, 14:18:29 UTC 2 years ago
March 21 2010, 15:01:26 UTC 2 years ago
These scanners are an incredible victory both for the enemies of liberty- who want us arguing about the tiny nuances of our obedience- and our active military enemies, too.
March 21 2010, 17:23:26 UTC 2 years ago
March 21 2010, 21:23:21 UTC 2 years ago
Shopping mall during Christmas rush.
Movie theater on opening night of some big movie.
Line at the DMV